delaney is relevant to anarchists in the way that good science fiction authors are meaningful to us, and delaney in particular is a very smart, gender-bending, philosophically minded author, who manages to tie together many threads in both fiction and non fiction writings. (so one of the things to look at here is how he writes… and ties personal anecdote into more general topics.)

three pieces from the new black seed (#2): the two anthropology pieces (by aragorn! and kevin tucker, respectively) and the white nationalism piece.
the premise is that there is a thread (or more) linking these three essays.
find the thread!
and this is sort of still on the topic of how we talk to people who disagree with us; the various formats at our disposal and how those formats are best used.

If that’s too long for slackers then I’d say to read pages 5-28, and 45-58 (in the physical book) at the least, or in the online version the first seven sections (separated by ***), and from the sentence “After the war, many reasonable people would speak of the aims of the Axis as irrational and of Hitler as a lunatic” through the end of the text. Though the entire essay is recommended and a quick read! So much fascinating history, so many implications and so easy to digest!!

Questions:

1) How would you summarize the defining aspects and/or functions of nationalism according to Perlman’s analysis?

2)Fredy asserts that racism is an instrument implemented to consolidate and utilize repressive forms of power against the threat of The Other, by reducing people to racial identities. He carefully separates race from lived experience, cultural and religious identity, kinship, and community. Is there a core element to the concept of race which exists outside of the context of racism? That is to say, is race racist? Does race even exist?

3) In our current epoch of post-modernism, where people who comprise most popular liberation movements have already been born into a society lacking any real connection to their ancestral/cultural histories, what else do they have to lose or what are other detriments to organizing on lines of racial or national identity (black liberation, post-occupy decolonize movement, etc.)?

4) Fredy leaves us with a horrifying conclusion–that nationalism is the most practical option for the oppressed, posing the question “What concentration camp manager, national executioner or torturer is not a descendent of oppressed people?” Is it possible to organize a liberatory movement that actually destroys power rather than inverting it? Why or why not, or what would that look like?